- Joined
- Jul 30, 2001
- Messages
- 633
I saw a TV programme called 'Public Enemy No 1' on Channel 4 last night, (Tue. 21/8/01) at 10pm. It was primarily about an incident in a town in Italy where three girls brutally murdered an elderly nun. Much of the programme, however, focussed on the idea that rock star Brian Warner aka Marilyn Manson had influenced them to do it. As I recall, the woman prosecuting the case was particularly convinced of it.
(To believe that someone can influence the actions of others through things that they make sounds like forteana to me)
Have there actually been any studies to determine exactly how much culture can influence a person's beliefs, thought processes and subsequent decisions and actions? There still seems to be no clear consensus on this, and all opinions seem to be based on pure conjecture. The same accusations came up with the Columbine shootings even though, apparently, it eventually emerged that the perpetrators weren't even fans of the band.
Warner himself appears to be of the opinion that he has neither caused nor influenced anything and merely reflects in his work what he sees in his audience e.g. boredom, frustration etc. Or is it that his stuff is designed to appeal as much to a particular audience as it is to offend certain other groups of people? He doesn't seem to have much of an agenda beyond that. One thing that cannot be said about his music is that it is full of anti-violence messages.
I personally think, (pure conjecture, of course,) there might be a kind of mutual perpetuation involved, that life influences art, then art influences life, and so on. What's the point of culture if it doesn't affect people?
But it seems to me that another question should be asked too. Why are certain people drawn to particular kinds of culture in the first place?
-Justin.
(To believe that someone can influence the actions of others through things that they make sounds like forteana to me)
Have there actually been any studies to determine exactly how much culture can influence a person's beliefs, thought processes and subsequent decisions and actions? There still seems to be no clear consensus on this, and all opinions seem to be based on pure conjecture. The same accusations came up with the Columbine shootings even though, apparently, it eventually emerged that the perpetrators weren't even fans of the band.
Warner himself appears to be of the opinion that he has neither caused nor influenced anything and merely reflects in his work what he sees in his audience e.g. boredom, frustration etc. Or is it that his stuff is designed to appeal as much to a particular audience as it is to offend certain other groups of people? He doesn't seem to have much of an agenda beyond that. One thing that cannot be said about his music is that it is full of anti-violence messages.
I personally think, (pure conjecture, of course,) there might be a kind of mutual perpetuation involved, that life influences art, then art influences life, and so on. What's the point of culture if it doesn't affect people?
But it seems to me that another question should be asked too. Why are certain people drawn to particular kinds of culture in the first place?
-Justin.